Is Ron Paul 2012's Black Swan?

For five years, the writing on the wall has been crystal clear. As 2007 began, the US Foreclosure Market Report for 2006 showed that foreclosures for the year had reached 1.2 million, an increase of 42 percent over the 2005 figure. In early February 2007, in the midst of a growing rash of bankruptcies among small US sub-prime mortgage issuers, New Century Financial announced that it was “recalculating” its “profits for the previous three quarters. New Century was one of the three biggest mortgage brokers in the US. In two days, its stock price dropped 40 percent. Six months later, President Bush was calling the now obvious collapse in the US real estate market a “blip” on the US economy. Two months after that, the stock market peaked. A year after that, in September/October 2008, the global economy froze solid and was only thawed by the biggest explosion of money creation in history. Now, here we are at the start of 2012. Nothing has changed. No positive steps have been made. The symptoms have been disguised under an avalanche of palliatives but the disease continues to eat away at the substance of the system on which it feeds. The major effort of government and “mainstream” analysts everywhere has been to avoid, deflect and actively silence any nascent discussion of the root of the problem.

The root of the problem is perfectly illustrated in the fact that since August 1971, the funded debt of the US government has risen from $US 400 Billion to $US 15,236 Billion. The severity of the problem is illustrated by the fact that with Mr Obama having yet to complete his third full year as President, he has presided over $US 4,600 Billion (or almost one-third) of that increase. The root of the problem is the abandonment of money - the final legal connection between Gold and the US Dollar was ended in August 1971. The severity of the problem is the grotesque expansion of what has taken its place.

None of this has been or is being discussed because the establishment in the US and everywhere else does not want it discussed. A REAL “black swan event” - an event that deviates by 180 degrees from what is “normally expected” - would be a political debate over root causes and basic principles. The great merit of Ron Paul - and the great service he is giving to his own and every other nation - is the fact that he is doing everything he can to raise the debate to that level. That makes Dr Paul a unique politician, a man who tells people what most of them DON’T want to hear or understand.

Or at least they don’t think they want to understand it. Dr Paul’s great and merited attractiveness to a growing number of admirers has a very simple source. He is that rarest of creatures - a FREE man. He is beholden to nobody. He has developed his ideas and his convictions over a long and fruitful life of independent thinking. He does not compromise. He homes in on the fundamental issue and principle of any political issue and serves it up without salt or other “seasoning”. He says what he means and he means what he says. He is the living embodiment of the “dream” that most Americans have long since given up on as they saw it slip further and further beyond their grasp. He is the only prominent person who is doing everything he can to turn the non-debate which masquerades as the “mainstream” in the US and global political economy into something of substance. That, far more than the presidency, is his goal.

This is the latest line of spin being pushed by the MSM: "Ron Paul adds some substance to the debate. He will move the overall conversation in the right direction."

Let it sink it a bit. What they are really doing is dismissing what he stands for in a very "pleasant" way. Ron Paul is complicit in this strategy. As he himself said this week, he doesn't envision himself in the White House.

Keep pretending slave. Keep believing in the steam vent candidate, you tool. No need to rise up and take your government back from the Barack O'Romney camp...you've got a real fighter in your corner with Ron Paul LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

He is that rarest of creatures - a FREE man. He is beholden to nobody. He has developed his ideas and his convictions over a long and fruitful life of independent thinking. He does not compromise. He homes in on the fundamental issue and principle of any political issue and serves it up without salt or other “seasoning”. He says what he means and he means what he says. He is the living embodiment of the “dream” that most Americans have long since given up on as they saw it slip further and further beyond their grasp.

And what could be more dangerous to the current spate of piggish politicians, morally bankrupt bankers, and NWO architects than to have a man that (gasp) insists that the nation follows its own constitution and ... people are starting to listen!!

That is truly a black swan event worthy of putting the military on every street corner.

One saving grace in all this. God has wisely given America a man who is humble and meek as well as honest. The PTB know that if Ron Paul died of practically anything, he would become a rallying point for that part of America they fear the most - those who love their country and their freedom.

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, and then you win, bitchez."

-- Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi

It would apppear they're about to "fight" Ron Paul.

Bring it on, MSM Lame Ass Stream Proxy Pundits & Bitchez doing the bidding of their 6 (count them - 6 corporations own all U.S. media outlets, whether network, cable, newspaper, magazine, radio or otherwise) corporate masters who feed off the teet of the fractional reserve banking Ponzi.

Ron Paul has broken through to the rank and file of U.S. Military Members who have grown tired of being deployed 5, 10 or 15 times, slaves to the establishment, parted from their families, to fight for many interests that actually go against their own interests & those of their children, families & communities (I'm not saying that this is always the case, but I am saying it is often, and may actually be more often than not, the case), and they grow especially sickened when they see private mercs making 10 times (tax free) what they do, working for a large 'security contracting firm' that won a no-bid (of de facto no-bid) multibillion dollar 'security contract' (the new, richly paid Hessians of our times), getting better equipment, support and rewards all around than they do, as they're fed bullshit about the 'mission' they're on, which is often bred from a morally damned black hole.

The Crony Capitalistic Kleptocracy, on whose behalf nearly all wars are initiated, has ticker tape parades for veterans half blown apart on the battlefields, deem them heroes for a day in some small city or village, with a local reporter from some small town rag covering the beat, and then they toss them into the refuge pile, with some pills to dull them to their new reality, broken, muffled and without redress, for the rest of their lives, because after all, they're just grist for the immoral mill when the truth is told, and people dare to call a spade a spade.

*p.s. - Keep cutting out the live sat feeds of active duty soldiers, freshly back from the sandbox, speaking out emphatically in support of Ron Paul, CNN, visibly laughable parody of a 'news network' that you are.

Just watched Town Hall on CSPAN. RP did a good job, and needs to make it clearer how he would create jobs. If it's making environment better for optimistic business development, then give examples. This needs to be clearer because so many out of work concerned they won't get unemployment benefits.

Also should talk more about getting the house and senate to work together to pass his policies. Corrupt politicians didn't vote for his bills because they served their corporate donors instead of the people. The only way to get house and senate to vote for Ron Paul's policies is for the people to push it, we have to push it. What he said at end was good, that his election sounds a powerful message.

good points about suggesting ron paul make the benefits of his economic policies more clear. one of the most important, imo, is removing the too big to fail banks from insolvency by orderly reorganization which will bring back transparency and the reduction of (unknown) counterparty risk which is preventing an organic recovery worldwide (accounts for japan's "missing decades").

It's not his job to create jobs. Can't we get past that idea? And even without congress he can rein in the military and save us hundreds of billions. (Unless he needs congress to undeclare the wars they never declared???)

Purposefully (by the media) made to seem.. to be the ONLY! Hope for “We the People” AGAINST! The onslaught by the Rich!

1.Austerity, is nothing more than another Tax Break for the Rich. It doesn’t matter if the Republicans and Democrats CONSPIRE! To shut down Government because of an imaginary Debt Ceiling or Ron Paul’s idea’s. There is no difference because the end result is the same.

2.These Rich people who have sold the wanna be rich the idea that Starving one of the most well armed group of citizens in the World is a GREAT Idea! A Hellava Way to be able to save Tax Dollars! History is full of stories about Hungry Armed People

Now telling yourselves LIES! About how this is different than that.. because it makes YOU FEEL GOOD! Is what you have been taught to do.. by the 5th Ave. Media Machine since you were very young!

Austerity will make people hungry and thusly giver everyone the right to go Zombie Hunting! Right?

It doesn’t matter how the people are made hungry or how the language from one document to another varies! The end result is Hunger.

Ron Paul is a WET! DREAM!! COME!!! TRUE!!!! FOR THE RICH!

Why? Because the Taxes for the Rich will NEVER! Be Raised! (the Democrats Proved that already)

And the belt tightening / austerity will flow downhill like shit always does! Thusly hungry poor people with nothing to lose and the internet to find just enough erroneous information to make them dangerous! Like Blaming the Jews for doing the WASP’s bidding / dirty work and thusly being vilified!

Jim-Bob in da woods is not going to give a rats ass about the difference.. and MOST! Of the information Provided by Google (Zionist owned) is that Jews (JOO’s) are BAD!

America is being Programmed to Hate America.. and when I say America I mean the majority of un-educated, ignorant Citizens of America are being Programmed (day and Night by Corporate Owned Media) to hate other segments and themselves. Good for Nothing! Government Assistance Receiving!! Sub 800 Credit Score Having!!! Wastes of Energy.

Once Iran is under control and the Sweet Lite Crude Supply is as stabilized as it can be.. there will be no use for all this extra stupid. The extra stupid will have played its part and it will be time to trim the fat. There is more Energy Conservation in getting rid of American’s and other 3rd World Un-Educated Trash than there is in Matching Fund Grid Scale Green Tech.. too be sure!

But once again! All of these facts don’t make anyone feel good!

We want to be right!

We want someone else to come in and save the day.. so we can watch dancing with the stars or post here on zerohedge about how smart we are.. as compared to the sheep!

America has a population explosion going on.. America is already a 3rd World Country for the Majority of Americans! I am guessing at least some of you have read enough to understand what the plans are for 3rd World, Population Explosion, Energy Consumers are.

Let the Ignorant Poor kill each other off! That will get rid of most of the Gene Pool that is tough enough to fight! And leave the more docile, easily controlled to manage!

The Rich will step in after the Poor kill enough of the Poor! Take their guns from them.. for their own protection.. saving them from themselves in the future! Thusly being the Saviors! Doing God’s Work! Protecting the sheep from the sheep in wolves clothing that was amongst them!

FEMA Camps maybe for the trouble makers after the Great American Kill Off! They wont have guns to protect themselves.. so off to the Camps!

Thank God for Wall Street Doing God’s Work..

Privatizing Prisons!

Privatizing the Army!

Thank God for Washington DC passing Laws that make all of this Legal! You Terrorists are worth almost $100,000 dollars a Year to House! PLUS!! The Free Labor that You Terrorists will be providing! No Judge! No Jury!! And Slaves! Lifetime Sentences without the Cost of a Trail!

And for all of you that won’t work! Well let’s see how tuff you are when they water board your wife or kids! You Terrorists will work! One way or another!

And for all of you thinking the Liberal Democrats were going to save the Country! With ALL THAT HOPE AND CHANGE!! Surprise!! LULZ!

AND!! Just for shits and giggles.. lets say Ron Paul.. does MAN! UP!! And do the right thing for the People of America.

And if Ron Paul did for some reason start to do the right thing? Or! If Rob Paul was Helping the Majority of Americans.. the Working Class and the Poor! Ron Paul would have his brains blown out! Just Like Kennedy, Martin Luther, Malcolm X...

WAKE UP!

“We the People” Lost a LONGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG! Time!! Ago!!!

Now go ignore the facts and spew your feelings of grandeur’ all over each other.. until you forget about all the ugly facts I just reminded you of.. cause I have not said anything that MOST! Of you here don’t already know! Providing Hope to People is a Nobel thing.. but I am fresh out of Nobel this Year!

Of course Main Lame News reports his words out of context today. During the back and forth with Gingrich about serving in the war, Lame News reports Gingrich's lies about Paul, but not Paul's response.

WE NEED OTHER TV NEWS. Zero Hedge is doing a great job for us, but middle America, my wife's parents, don't get their news from the internet. Come on all you unemployed, raise money to start an accurate news station that will not be afraid to play Ron Paul's words. His response from the question in last nights debate of what he does on a regular Saturday night when he's not in a debate, 'Reading an economic textbook' was great.

RP is being set up as a potential face of the destruction of the Libertarian Party.

Most of us recognize there is a problem with the current system and that the system (financial and political) is going to crash). Both Republicrats and Democans want power but don't want the blame (left holding the blame).

From a conspiracy theorists point of view, a perfect situation is arising. A disasterous confrontation with Iran that leads to higher oil prices and a severe downturn in the U.S. economy and RP actually winning the Repub nomination. If he actually won the presidency, RP then has to deal with a depression with a non cooperative dem or repub congress. Libertarian party loses credibility.

I do not support RP. Ron Paul is just as hypocritical as the others. He puts pork in his bills and votes against it (after he knows it has enough votes to pass. He supports term limits but does not lead by example). In fact I don't support anyone anymore. They are all corrupt because the system is corrupt.

The democrats govern from the left to center - the republicans govern from the right to center. In essence they both aim to govern from the center and both support big government that controls vast amounts of money (power). Who wants to take over a company (gov) to make it smaller and weaker against competitors?

WTF? Ron Paul is just as hypocritical as the others? Are you a Huff Po plant or just wallowing in the corporate media swill? I'm going to call bullshit and need links on the "putting pork in his bills" because from what I"ve seen there is no evidence of that.

And as for term limits, you fucking retard, it is obvious he stays as a lone voice for making substantive changes to our country at personal sacrifice to himself, not just to enrich himself as most greedy others do, and if you can't see that you don't deserve your franchise.

Sorry for the off topic, but can anyone say if ZH gets paided extra for click-throughs on the ads? I'd be happy to click on the Obama campaign banners just to transfer from a bad cause to a good one. I can always wash my hands afterward.

All I know is that most MSM will not even mention Ron Paul's name. Most polls have Paul 2nd behind Romney in NH, however, there is no coverage or dialog about Paul......they actually FEAR this man......so that is why I am supporting him. -theking

Your wish is my command. And after I've reamed your ass enough that even a government waste such as Amtrak can run through it, I'd advise you to educate yourself. Cut your imbecile insults as if shows you to be the fucktard.

Unfortunately, dumbasses like you doesn't realize that I support many of RP's ideas (which aren't his own). In my opinion the sole and only role of the President is Commander and Chief. I also believe most every Federal departments are unconstitutional which is more than even Ron Paul says.

So take you pussy ass shit and educate yourself. I did a simple google search you twat.

Ron Paul gets a part of the funding for his district that he can. That is his job.

Would he eliminate pork if he could? Absolutely.

There is a difference between coulda and shoulda. Would you prefer a complete sellout in his office instead?

Politics is not black and white. A minimum of sophistication understands that you look to those leaders that do the most for the people versus those that do the least. You can pick apart anyone and any subject- without exception, but who offers the best opportunity?

Seriously people are so fooled by the true hypocrites they don't recognize the straw men they prop up as alternative hypocrites.

The choice Ron Paul has with "earmarks" is to either give them to his constituents or give it back to the federal gov. He has likened it to tax refunds; you paid, they make it available to you so everybody take them and is silly not to.

Also he doesn't get votes for his bills because everyone else is a DC status quo political douche machine waiting to grab more and more to dole out benefits to friends and reap rewards from it. So he creates a bill for term limits and nobody signs it, yet they all say they "agree" there should be term limits; and then when he plays by their rules they say "well you've been in office so you must not like term limits" and the story is put out there that he's the hypocrite it's fucking ridiculous.

It goes on and on and the trolls that show up to ZH are just that, sub-human trolls that want to propagate the lies and mistruths with half-facts lacking the intent behind them and their origination.

(oh yea, I forgot that the Fed is supposed to be responsible for education under RP)

$26 million for Washington, D.C. “Reading is Fundamental” program

• $10 million for Boston, Mass., “Reach Out and Read” national center

• $200,000 for Bay City MEHOP to recruit nurse practitioner

• $1.748 million for University of Houston-Victoria for DNA testing and genetic diagnostic lab

• $248,942 for UTMB for employee wellness program for small businesses

• $90,000 for Victoria Chamber of Commerce for business/career-related education for youth

Speaking of education, did you know that RP is the sole sponsor of an education bill, March 8, 2011. (Fed gov - constitutionally authorized - hmm. LOL. I laugh because this thread flared up because I called RP a hypocrate),

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow individuals a credit against income tax for tuition and related expenses for public and nonpublic elementary and secondary education.

My argument would be that the Fed should not be involved with education and subsidizing tuition through taxation (a real libertarian view). How about we let tuition prices decline through real competition and free markets instead of subsidizing them. How about the fact that government maintains control over its citizens through taxation to pay for school.

Transportation under RP (another department the Fed is constitutionally authorized?)

• $2.2 million for City of Bay City for improvements to electrical wiring in low and moderate income housing

• $3.6 million to construct inter-modal transit facility in Victoria

• $2 million to beautify Galveston Seawall and support Transit Access Program in Galveston

• $25,000 to install security cameras at Fox Run Apartments in Victoria (I really love for you guys to explain this one)

• $1.96 million to replace buses in and around Victoria

• $2 million to renovate transit maintenance facility in Galveston

• $5 million to reconfigure Texas Clipper training ship

Keep em coming LOL.

I was asked to present links and I did. I have provided links and numbers and so far I have only received insults (which is fine). Yet none of you have provided any links or numbers that refute what I say.

I'm only going to go after the one issue here that I know well, and that is your education BS.

We believe that we have had money confiscated from us for the purpose of educating children under the Federal auspices. Since our children are not getting such federal indoctrination, it only makes sense that we get refunded for that which we did not use.

Personally, I'm for ending all government education. Children were educated before government schools and before the Department of Education came along. Without the property taxes that go mostly toward paying for the local schools to babysit the progeny of the lazy dumb asses, I could buy more resources for my own children. Yes, we homeschool. And I'm a university professor so that I have the time to help teach my kids.

But, though I've argued here for the ability to stop paying for government schools, I'd also argue that there is no reason for me to get a $1000 per child refundable tax credit from the IRS each year. Yes, we go back to old school libertarianism in my neck of the woods.

Well said in some respects. Again, my main point that no one has addressed is that all is not what you see regarding any politician, including RP. Notice I am not endorsing anyone because I am not, pure and simple. As for the BS comment - again continue with the insults as it shows YOUR nature, not mine.

Since your reply was tame and founded in some logic and reasonable, I will respond in kind and try to actually have a dialogue as opposed to throwing names around like meathead (other poster- please!!!)

We are unfortunately in a society of grab what you can. That is understandable. However, for opinion sake, I think we all know that the crap is about to hit the fan, when it is the issue as it has been for some time. It is only the last few years that more have gone to that thinking. I hate to see RP supporters be disappointed if he loses or if he wins and unable to deliver the promises. He is only one man in a corrupt system and that is one GREAT point that every single poster missed. I have also pointed out that he is not without fault which none of us are (myself included).

So I challenge you to throw out the BS statement. You can do better as you should understand that statement adds nothing to a productive discussion. BTW - congrats on homeschooling. That is commendable.

Look at: the Non Verbal Communication (NVC) - the 3 (three) shrugs = asserting he is under DISTRESS! [From US Secret Service Agent Henry J RYBKA after the Orders given by Emory P ROBERTS (US Secret Service Agent in Charge) Ordering the US Secret Service Agents to Stand Down from their Legal & Public Duty to protect the President Of The US!] - HIGH TREASON!

JFK - [the late] Dr CHARLES CRENSHAW INFORMS US OF THE FIGHT WITH US SECRET SERVICE MEN [The late Dr Earl ROSE (Pathologist at Parkland Hospital was NOT allowed to perform an Autopsy under Texas State Law)!] [+ DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE by FBI][+ PERVERTING THE COURSE OF JUSTICE (by US Secret Service + CIA + FBI)!] + HIGH TREASONhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGNMBRq3Kxw

JFK's body was taken from the PARKLAND Hospital to the BETHESDA Naval Hospital so it was under the Naval/Military Control of the C-in-C who was the President.

Thus LBJ [as V-P] was determined to be sworn in BEFORE the return flight back to Washington. That way he would have total control of the Assassination Committee - the notorious WARREN Commission [with his friends on the Committee]!

JFK WARNED US OF ALL OF THE ILLUMINATI ON 11-12-1963 - ON 11-22-1963. JFK was killed by inter alia LBJ & JEH [who gave the Orders - Secret Service Personnel were withdrawn just before the Presidential entourage entered the symbolic pyramid on Elm Street - the plan to assassinate him - HIGH TREASON - at the apex of the symbolic Pyramid].

Note the actions of Henry RYBKA [Secret Serice Agent assigned to be next to the US Presidential limousine - Vehicle Identification Number: "GG 300" (symbolic numbers)] as he shrugs his arms clearly 3 (three) times as a clear Non Verbal Communication (NVC) sign that he asserts he was under "Distress" as he was ORDERED over the radio by Emory P. ROBERTS [the Secret Service Agent-In-Charge] of the US Presidential Detail in the Secret Service back-up car to withdraw [NOW!]... [to open up the line of fire]. [For James LINES; John ROSELLI & Charles NICOLETTI].

JFK - THE FBI KNEW - J Edgar HOOVER WAS IN CHARGE - A GOOD FRIEND OF LBJ

LBJ was very close to those in charge of the FBI [J Edgar HOOVER] and the CIA [John McCONE - John McCone 1961-1965Kennedy exercised greater supervision, and appointed a Republican with a general engineering background. McCone, despite a lack of intelligence background, is often considered one of the most competent DCIs and excellent managers. He directed the IC during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The agency stepped up its activity in Southeast Asia under President Lyndon B. Johnson. McCone resigned from his position of DCI in April 1965, believing himself unappreciated by Johnson. McCone's final policy memorandum to Johnson argued that expansion of the war in Vietnam would arouse national and world discontent over the war before it brought down the North Vietnamese regime] - whereas LBJ of Texas was close to the MAFIA (Chicago boss, Sam GIANCANA & Tampa boss, Santa TRAFFICANTE - linked very closely to the CIA, it was under the Mafia that James FILES, John ROSELLI & Charles NICOLETTI were deployed in the professional assassination of JFK - using the method of Triangulation (firing shots from 3 different angles) - James NILES admitted that he and his 2 Mafia gunmen were involved in shooting to death the US President) the Mafia had financially supported Jo KENNEDY Senior (who had been a Boot-legger during Prohibition - they expected JFK & RFK to deliver support to lay off organised crime due to their financial support of the Democratic Campaign) when this did not materialise the Mafia feeling let down over the non support over Cuba were very angry with JFK & RFK [RFK was the brother of JFK, the Attorney General, who wanted strict enforcement against Organised Crime - under the MAFIA which was very closely linked to the CIA]...

GHW BUSH was to become head of the CIA [he was working in Dallas, Texas on November 22,1963 - a good friend of LBJ]. GHWB was to be made President Of The US.

Ron Paul functions as a congressman- that is what his job entails. As a President, Paul would have greater latitude to influence policy. Here, he can put his political and economic phiolosophy to work in a way he can't as a congressman.

Thus, when you compare candidates, you look at the type of platforms they would offer. Ron Paul's platform would clearly be different from any other candidate. If he were fulfill his promises, the American people would benefit in ways the other candidates will not provide.

There is a reason people educate themselves- so they can identify the best possible outcomes. Try it, you'll like it.

You know, as someone who's been accused of being a mole a half dozen times on this site...I'm starting to believe that there are moles on this site. You may have just made a convert out of me mr. 'po.

I am ready an willing to believe every single thing you've posted as true. I am certain that, in his 30 years in politics, Ron Paul has sometimes done things against his own widely preached beliefs for the benefit of his constituents. And it doesn't change a single thing.

The man is not a saint, nor does any sane supporter of RP think he never engaged in politicking. It's not a good thing of course. But for you to demand ABSOLUTE ideological purity to back him is really, really stupid. Ron Paul has been consistent in his beliefs and wants to change the system. He wants to return to our founders' principles and reform the govt such that these kinds of things can't happen anymore. Name another politician (with more than just a local backing on the school board) who holds to that. Name one that even APPROACHES that.

If you expect absolute impeccability from an American politician on the national stage then you'll be waiting a long, long time, sir. Right here, right now, there is one guy, and THIS is the guy. No one else will do it; no one else has a chance to do it; no one else will even NOT make the overbearing statist system even WORSE. So it's back the guy who has been 99% consistent towards liberty, or back any other who has been 99% consistent towards tyranny.

I doubt there will be another chance before it's too late, and this is a real end-game struggle here. We need every man in the trenches. So if you're actually a libertarian, STOP working for the Statists. Otherwise shut the f*ck up and find somewhere else to troll for pay, maybe somewhere where the people are less informed.

...Unfortunately, dumbasses like you doesn't realize that I support many of RP's ideas (which aren't his own).

So they're RP's ideas... but they aren't his own? How does that work?

If you mean he didn't originate them, well, in the subject of economics and politics, how many people's ideas are 'their own'? Everyone builds on what has gone before. I'm sure even clever sessinpo's ideas came chiefly from sources outside himself.

sessinpo - well I agree with the above posters, I think you are chasing your tail and have no idea what you are talking about. Don't they arm you paid trolls with even half decent arguments before sending you out to try and disinform the masses?

I think we all can agree that Ron Paul is not perfect, but comes closer than any candidate now or any we've had for a long time.

Trying to smear Ron Paul is like trying to smear Ghandi in a room full of popes from the middle ages........

Well, to be fair, there WERE some great Popes in the middle ages (along with the monstrously immoral ones). And Ghandi did have that whole "sleeping naked with little girls and giving everyone enemas" thing.

Do some research and look at his dealings with Red China in the State of Texas. Ron Paul is in their back pocket, and thus that explains his insouciance in regards to Iran, which is one of Red China's proxies, the other being North Korea.

Ron Paul was talking about these issues before China was a turd in the pants of the economy. Also he's not running as a congressman again so either he's president or nothing and then what? What big gains will they get from him? None. That is the worst troll argument yet you vile corrupt goon.

If Ron Paul is a plant, then TPTB are WAY, WAY too good at their job, and have inadvertently set off a storm of anti-tyrannical movements. Plus if they're that good, then we never had a chance anyway, so it doesn't matter. Either way you should back Ron Paul.

While the MSM keep saying RP's "unelectable," it's only because of the relentless smear campaign of the powers that be, who are shitting in their britches over the genuine change that he represents. And while I don't want RP to reach the White House (in which case the coming collapse would be blamed on him and surely made all the worse for this reason), I do want him to get so uncomfortably close that when the "Storm Surge" hits -- http://theautomaticearth.blogspot.com/2012/01/january-3-2012-storm-surge... --people will have someone to turn to for genuine leadership.

He and Ron Paul are the only ones qualified to even be running. Paul has years of experience, Buddy too, plus an actual Economics Degree. Might come in handy one would think... The others are absolute clowns, more like watching a Reality TV show.

Another important thing to remember about Dr Paul, is that he is selling something different to the other candidates. They are selling themselves, as the best person for the job. He is selling an idea, the idea that Liberty is worth something. Candidates come and go, as Ron Paul will, but the idea he has implanted in so many people, especially the young, will not leave them easily. So many men my age ( 30 ), I think are essentially romantics, who want something to believe in, something worth fighting for, but have grown up in the information age and have seen through the traditions of God, King and Country etc. And in the end, you come to the conclusion all thinking men must; that Liberty is the fundamental base from which all that is good in the world comes. And after that no party or candidate will ever bribe your vote for 30 pieces of silver, and an Iron chain around your throat.

The darker "reality", in my view, is that nothing will reverse the strangling grip on this nation. Ask any peer where inflation comes from. Ask them what the benefit of being robbed of 2-3% ("on average") annually, of all income and savings priced in fiat is, exactly. Ask them about the symbolism on the Dollar.

Truly, Ron Paul inflames the best of noble passions. But if average Americans just want a new president, regardless of noble ideals, there is no hope. The problems is so, so, so much deeper than elections could ever hope to solve. I root for Ron Paul so that more fellow travelers in this life can awaken at least one level deeper than they are now.

Americans need to realize that hope in the current system keeps them enslaved

After seeing it quoted or mentioned so much on ZH, I finally read The Fourth Turning. Written in the mid 90's, it damn near gave me goosebumps, as it is dead on on its predictions of what we would be facing in this current 4th turning (and almost to the year - authors thought the turning would occur around 2006). What is most mindblowing is the type of president/leader that the authors said would emerge - I'll be damned if it doesn't describe Ron Paul to a T, and the authors wrote that leader would be supported by the younger generation (25-45 year olds), against the Baby Boomer generation, and its candidate, whose excesses got us into the mess that signals the 4th Turning.

Just look at twitter and you will see how many people around the world know of Ron Paul and hear his message of freedom and want the liberty of which he preaches, which was codified in the Constitution and is the Law of the Land but has been so long abandoned and forgotten.

A perfect quote to describe Ron Paul:

"All great truths begin as blasphemies" George Bernard Shaw

And more appropriate for people today:

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

So many men my age ( 30 ), I think are essentially romantics, who want something to believe in, something worth fighting for, but have grown up in the information age and have seen through the traditions of God, King and Country etc. And in the end, you come to the conclusion all thinking men must; that Liberty is the fundamental base from which all that is good in the world comes.

I read your post a few times with great interest, focusing on the "many men my age (30)." My view is in part different from yours, and my only point in reply is to highlight that difference and pose the question as to why.

I wholly agree that liberty - a free society, or "ordered liberty" as some call it - is the key to innovation and prosperity, and the "good" that allows a nation to flourish. However, I believe that liberty stems from acknowledgement of unalieanable, God-given rights. Which gets me to our difference. You state that you have "seen through the traditions of God..." I read that as an agnostic or otherwise dismissive sentiment of "religion" as nothing more than a set of rituals that has been twisted and often used for very bad purposes (which it certainly has at times). For me, that apostasy has driven people away from what I know to be the truth about God, which is entirely consistent with ordered liberty and the framers' design of the Constitution.

The apostate religious practices have so permeated people that I am often surprised at how far their devastation has reached. As you disclose your age, I wonder if the 30-ish generation is particularly prone to the impacts of the world's recent heretics and antichrists (e.g., Catholic Church scandal, mega-church laundering, hypocritical behaviors of highly visible folks like Mel Gibson, etc.). Plus the fact that the secular society - particularly the U.S. public education system - rewrites history and promotes and anti-God agenda rather strongly. For me, none of these things dismiss God, but they distract from the truth about Him. Indeed, Scripture is very clear about such things transpiring, and such things reinforce my belief in the truth.

For all my rambling, it boils down to this: The libertarian perspective seems very solid in terms of liberty, morality, and an ordered, respectful society, but does not (typically) link the source of those things to a Creator. I cannot reconcile that with my view that freedom starts with freedom in Christ, and so I'm simply left to wonder. BTW, I'm not trying to start a battle nor trying to change minds (that's not up to me)...it's just your comment struck me and I thought I'd try to articulate a gap that I struggle to understand.

I guess you could say I believe religion went off the rails a long time ago, and that Jesus message has been twisted to support a fake power hierarcy. I do not believe God is found in Church. And that I would not fight for the Churches "God", King or Counrty is what I meant. I'm pretty sure Jesus does not want us to bomb Iran. Or vote for Santorum.

It is indeed amazing is that the large majority of the Christian community sees absolutely no irony in the fact that the Republican candidates who most openly declare themselves conservative Christians, are also the most openly eager to bomb the fuck out of Iran. Like Romney's view of the corporation, Iran is ultimately just people. So the "I am a strong Christian" candidates day in and day out say they really, really want to bomb a bunch of people to death, and many of their Christian conservative followers Praise Jesus as they agree in His Name.

Seriously people talking about "heretics" and "anti-christs" get fucking real. There was an awakening when the founders of the US created the constitution and they didn't need to flaunt god in every document to help them figure out what natural rights were. They said "creator" to give people a basis for understanding not to push the idea that some specific god is fighting good and evil.

Religious fanatics are and have been the problem for millenniums because they use fiction as truth to take people's inherent fears about a scary world and twist them towards a common goal all the while wielding a power they claim is derived from some mystical super being and they are the channel through which it speaks and will forgive you when you break the very rules it prescribes.

Man (woman) is the problem of man (woman) and their desires have never changed and their insecurities have always dominated their thoughts.

Jesus didn't create the golden rule, Hebrews didn't wander the desert not knowing without the 10 commandments of not to kill or steal.

That people need god to fear them into doing "right" says more about a person's true moral compass in the absence of that fear than it says about religion's ability to provide morals.

10. Jesus said, "I have cast fire upon the world, and look, I'm guarding it until it blazes."

16. Jesus said, "Perhaps people think that I have come to cast peace upon the world. They do not know that I have come to cast conflicts upon the earth: fire, sword, war.For there will be five in a house: there'll be three against two and two against three, father against son and son against father, and they will stand alone."

Oh yeah...

100. They showed Jesus a gold coin and said to him, "The Roman emperor's people demand taxes from us."He said to them, "Give the emperor what belongs to the emperor, give God what belongs to God, and give me what is mine."

If you use the emperor's coins....then you have to give him a cut at some time in the future.If you don't use his coins....the emperor has no right to demand them from you.

So you know, none of your three cites are sourced from Scripture. The first two from the unrecognized "Gospel of Thomas" and #100 misquotes the question and appends the response with "give me what is mine" before perverting the whole message as a result of missing the message.

Brother outofhere: thanks. I take the red with the green on these things, because it's really the number of reads that counts. For "we face death all day long; we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered" (Rom. 8:36).

you just opened an even wider gap for me to understand both points of view? all cultural products the US is exporting nowadays have this "war against God" you are mentioning, and believe me, it's really hard to understand it here.

In Europe, we had the French Revolution that, among lots of other things, brought down many catholic prerogatives and led to the expropriation of church assets nearly everywhere in Continental Europe.

Since then, the "Separation of Church and State" has been quite "complete" - only to return (in France, of all place) with the bans on the veils for muslim women. So, as in Turkey, the Non-Religious Laity is under "attack" from the Religious (in this case Islamic).

But you guys have this "War on Religion". Boy, is this wierd seen from here. Creationism? Banning of Christmas Trees? "Season's Greetings"?

OK, OK, perhaps we have a different scenario, since we lack a strongly religious majority - but at least, after all those wars, we have a slightly bigger propension to tolerance, which seems getting scarcer in the US.

Take the word you use: "apostate". Do you know that historically it's nearly always used to denominate someone that has left the true faith and therefore has to be killed?

If this was not the meaning you wanted to give, than why don't you use something less threathening, like non-religious? Are you seriously that concerned about the souls of other people that you think you have to "fight back"?

The reason I don't want to see religious symbols in government places is because then all the crackpots are going to start putting scientology booths up testing thetans and the wiccans will be castin spells and there'll be voodoo and santaria chicken beheadings in public.

Not allowing this "tolerance" is just hypocrisy unless they are truly promoting just the Abrahamic religions which are constantly warring and are anything but peaceful.

Who said that following the Abrahamic religions as you call them would bring about peace? Scripture indicates quite the contrary: disciples of Christ can expect persecution, death, and torture as our lot. Nations will war with nations. Such outcomes are completely consistent with Scripture.

I use "apostate" quite deliberately and in the context which I understand it (see, e.g., Matthew 24 and 2 Thessalonians). The "apostate church" is a false church, nutured by the fact that its witnesses are "formerly" followers of the truth, and whose pervesion of that truth is subtle enough as to seem genuine. The biggest threat to Christianity is from those who formerly identified with Christianity and can quote Scripture out of context to demonstrate hypocrisy of the belief system.

So few have actually read the Bible - and even fewer made an attempt to understand it - that it is easy for apostates to spread the venom and continually validate what people understand as hypocrisy in the church.

Many people who can make some reference to what the Bible "says" are speaking in half-truths. Once they can observe (and point out) an inconsistency with that half-truth, it's easy from there to dismiss the message altogether. That is the "apostate church." And it is pervasive.

So what I'm getting at is that if people understood the truth about God in the way I do, they would see that truth as perfectly compatible with the pursuit of liberty. But if what people see is the apostate church that has been fostered and nutured right before their eyes, then they will see hypocrisy that has no place in the pursuit of liberty.

even slaves have the freedom of believing in Christ, and Jesus's teachings do not place that much emphasis on other freedoms

-----------------

when the Pharisees approached JC as if he were campaigning for political power, they asked Him if He was for or against the tributes to Rome.

the answer was one of His Funniests: He asked them to produce a coin (with wich the taxes would be paid)

then He asked if someone recognized the head of Ceasar, and as they did, He answered "Render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God"

the nationalists denouced Him as a traitor to his country

the MSM declared He was all for high taxes

the ultra-conservative-religious (the Pharisees) denouced Him for adoring the Emperor Caesar as God (because giving tribute/paying taxes was reserved, in their opinion, to Temples (they were theocratic), i.e. paying taxes = adoring as God

the King definitely started to fear this man, the Temple thought He would try to restrict their tax flows (which He later did by campaining against the moneylenders in the temple)

Many people who can make some reference to what the Bible "says" are speaking in half-truths. Once they can observe (and point out) an inconsistency with that half-truth, it's easy from there to dismiss the message altogether. That is the "apostate church." And it is pervasive.

You have hit the nail on the head with your subtle twisting of the story. And you seem too fluent in it to not know what I mean:

The Pharisees walked away from this scene baffled. They never denounced Jesus for adoring Caesar as God. He never said anything about whether it was "right" to pay taxes, because He left open the question of what belonged to Caesar. Further, as you (should) know, Jesus told tax collectors to collect only what they were supposed to, and nothing more. And there is no record that the "Temple thought he would try to restrict their tax flows." He did not "campaign" against moneylenders - he later ravaged the Temple because of the illicit property confiscation that was taking place there (BTW, if they thought He was going to restrict their tax flows, they probably would have tried to prevent Him from entering the Temple courts in the first place). And none of these events were reasons for which he was found guilty of a crime. He was found guilty of heresy for claiming He was God. But he was not sentenced to crucifixion for that - his sentence was augmented by the trade for Barabbas.

Maybe I'm being picky, but it's this kind of half truth that breeds ambivalence. How many are walking around thinking there were 3 wise men, there is a book of Revelations, that Christ had no siblings, that the parable of the Good Samaritan is about being a good person, that Eve bit into an apple, that the "writing on the wall" is some 20th century cliche, and so on? How far from the truth does one need to be to have abandoned it altogether?

LOL, it is a really long time since I had this kind of debates (mostly with Gesuits, who are often accused to love debate more than Jesus), so yes, some in some parts I might be rusty (memory is a fickle ally) or just plain wrong...

I agree with you in many points, though my interest (in history) draw me quite often to the fact that the pharisees had their own agenda, and the question was political, usually painted as trying to corner Jesus into giving an answer about the question of paying taxes to Rome

later (not covered by the new testament, you were right and I was wrong) they did try for a time to slander Him of "adoring Caesar" by alleging that He meant this with "render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar" - at the times where the debate raged if a statue of the Divine Caesar would be allowed in the Temple or not, so around 50 AD and 70 AD (afterwards it became moot with the Siege of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple).

Sorry, what is the big difference between "campaigning" and "ravaging the Temple (Courtyard - where the moneylenders were)"? His statement was about the practice of paying in (roman coin) money for the token(s of) sacrifices (a relatively new policy of the Temple that made them wealthy in money instead of burnt ashes of animal sacrifices). I always understood this part as His two cents about what kind of sacrifice pleases Him - and what not. The Temple started to feel threathened after this incident. I have no clue if the "illicit property confiscation" you mean is about the same.

Again, the historical/political context: The "other" issue between the Pharisees, the Sadducees and the Temple was about the "legality", or, better, "piety" of using Roman Coin to exchange it for the Religious Coins (fiat tokens with animal figures) which were then donated to the Temple. The Sadducees were the "literal" party against it (in words, not in deeds), the Pharisees were mostly divided (though they were usually the party of "tort reform" by stating that "Eye for an Eye" could be translated in "pay a reasonable amount of money" instead of poking out the aggressor's eye). The Temple (and the "money lenders") was getting very rich. The Pharisees were somewhat in conflict with John the Baptist and for them, Jesus was a disciple of St. John, so they wanted to know his position. What Jesus did in the Temple made Him and his followers the "fourth party" in the strife (and the most radical, for some). The Romans, in all this, did not understand (the lazy ignorant conquerors) the issues and just wanted to know if someone was preaching against taxes for Rome.

---------------

My point is: in Europe, this phrase was used to substantiate the claim that the separation between church and state is fully compatible with His teachings. Right or wrong, "render to Caesar" is roughly seen as "you, as Christians, are not mandated to erect a Theocracy (at all costs) on this world". Please remember that there is a long historical background of a Holy Roman Empire, the Popes, the Vatican State, etc. etc.

This is why if find your request for Christian References in the "Affairs of State" so fascinatingly foreign and puzzling...

For me, it fits in most things, the libertarian philosophy. Religion is always going to be a deeply personal subject to poke around in.

But I guess the easiest way for me to add to what I think you mean is, libertarians would not/do not force someone to come to Christ. As Christ would not force anyone to come to Him. He only asks you to come of your own free will.

To me Libertarians are strict Constitutionalists recognizing through the DoI "we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights" and they leave it right there, at the individuals free will, to take it at face value (or not) and continue on with the rights of man in the secular sense as it pertains to the relationship of the people & their government.

So, for me, there is no contradiction. It is tolerant of both the believer and the non.

Christianity is under siege. Why? A professor at the Language Defense School told me why: Christianity is the cohesion that holds together a diverse people to stand as foe against an organized tyranny that conspires to enslave America. Regrettably, some have used Christianity for their own selfish purposes but its core truth continues unabated.

Wealthy capitalists and international bankers such as Schiff, Soros, the Warburgs and Rothschilds, Hammer and Rockefeller who have financed the one-world conspiracy both here and abroad for more than a century consider Christianity their main enemy, a formidable enemy that would thwart their installation of a one-world socialist government. Christianity, therefore, is to be labeled a superstition and outlawed.

Communism is secular-humanist madness; it parallels the fanaticism of its founder, Karl Marx, who declared in his poem The Pale Maiden:

Thus heaven I’ve forfeited, I know it full well.My soul, once true to God, is chosen for hell.

Christianity swept the world like a wild fire because it stressed the worth of every individual, be that man slave or free man; that all men were created in the image of God and equal in His eyes. America became the land of opportunity based on that liberating concept –a concept that is anathema to all tyrants.America’s Constitution and the basis of the American Dream are founded upon that principle.Now, our “city on a hill” is endangered with the very loss of its Constitution and its right to practice the religion of its roots.

Ron Paul acknowledges that “we have, as a people, lost our confidence and our understanding of what true liberty is all about and where it comes from.It doesn't come from the government. Our liberties come from our Creator."

Being a human being gives me my rights, my creator(s) is my mom and dad, no other person, god, entity, ghost, or invisible anything gives me my rights, i don't care what has been written in the past by some other person or group of people 2000 years ago or 10 years ago, you have religious views that are your own, and that's what they are views, they may be true in your mind, but facts they are not, and that is not debatable.

I am a free person. If there is a god out there, i am positive he wouldn't want you to go around worshipping him all the time and wouldn't sit around watching his son get torchered to death. Pretty sick if you ask me. I am for individual liberty and justice. I bow to no one nor should anyone else, human, celestial, or otherwise. I certainly wouldn't want anyone bowing to me. Only approximately 10% of the people that are brainwashed from an early age about religion or any other piece of propaganda have the ability of critical thinking to determine for themselves whether or not what is being peddled is nonsense or not.

Mayhem: I suspect much of the source of your concern stems from the fact that one of the most prominent voices of modern Libertarianism is Ayn Rand. She was famously anti-religion, viewing organized religion in all forms as essentially a cult (the irony was lost on her). This makes sense, because her fundamental belief system was me, me, me, me, me. Hardly consistent with most mainstream religious teaching.

Rand may be an influence for modern libertarians, but Rand was NOT a libertarian. She referred to libertarians as "hippies of the right" and very much approved of foreign military adventures. IMO she's more closely aligned with neocons than libertarianism....but I have a different definition of libertarianism than you refer to above.

That "fundamental belief" that you describe is bullshit and is not what she wrote of. The people in the books that she wrote, in case you didn't notice, were trying to bring great things to humans to make their lives better and to advance humanity.

I am so sick of people twisting the idea that living for others is more important than living for yourself first.

You are the asshole that would be in a full lifeboat and would drown everyone trying to bring more survivors on board.

This is an ok post but you're missing the point of leaving religion out of the LP. What good is "freedom" if it comes with strings attached to religion? Is that real liberty? No! The LP gives you the freedom to believe freedom comes from God and me to believe that freedom is just a great idea that I support without citing a source.

So let me reiterate. Freedom with strings attached is not freedom, so citing religion ing the LP will undo every other principal liberty.

Atheism comes with chains attached. Christianity does not come with strings; it comes with a key to unlock the handcuffs that men would put on other men.

The man who is intolerant of the views and values that other men hold sacred, who wants to “root up all the religion and civilization that made him and wash out all the common sense of ownership and honesty, would let his culture and his country be flattened out by savages from the ends of the earth.” – G.K. Chesterton

If freedom ends, it will end the way it always ends, with man’s descent into paganism and barbarism during some six thousand years of his history: his submission to Authority, to Government, to Tyranny.

Wars were fought over the philosophy of Nietzsche and Marx, these men who sat in the dust in their little offices and wrote the junk criticizing the morally, the Christianity, the triumph of individualism, property rights and freedom and the good that America’s Christian founders brought to mankind.

The late Whittaker Chambers, after a long, agonizing search finally realized man’s ultimate happiness can be found only in Christianity, not in communism. Secular-humanist communism, he wrote, “is not new. It is, in fact, man’s second oldest faith. Its promise was whispered in the first days of the Creation under the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil: ‘Ye shall be as Gods.’”

The late Dr. Bella V. Dodd, an active member of the Communist Party, U.S.A., who by 1950 had left the atheistic CPUSA to embrace Christianity, painstakingly explained that the ultimate object of communism was the destruction of Christianity.

I generally enjoy your viewpoint, however, this one was fractured and riddled with half-thoughts. Marxism was supposed to actually resemble early Christianity very closely. And, to an extent, it succeeded but degenerated into a compulsive mass movement that ended in fascism. Nietzsche is much more difficult to bring into this discussion because his ideas were very scattered and often somewhat apolitical, but if you are referring to the Ubermensch and its use by the Nazi's then I must say that the distortion is obvious. Any fully versed person would concur on this subject.

Lastly, secular religions in the West are founded on Judeo-Christian thought. Anybody who thinks religion can be 'abolished' and replaced by some secular doctrine is at best comic or at worst intellectually dishonest.

First, there’s no such thing as secular religion. And to say that in any way the writings of Karl Marx touched on the teachings of Jesus Christ is a line even the atheists could not swallow.

Christianity was the unlocking of freedom for the individual; quite the opposite from Stalin’s you-have-to-break-eggs-to-make-an-omelette philosophy.

“Judeo-Christian” refers to the foundations of Christian beliefs that followed the path of the Israelites; but in modern times the term has been misused to water down the Christian message that was given in the New Testament that God sent his Son as Savior of mankind. The Jewish religion presents a contrast to this in that it disavows the New Testament and Christ as the Messiah.

These conflicts have led to thephilosophy of secular humanism, another word for atheism and a concept you may be thinking of when you use the term “secular religion.”

You're confused. Stalin is a separate issue altogether, we were discussing Marxist theory, which was in fact founded upon an ideal of egalitarianism as I correctly pointed out. I'd be glad to refer you to the literature in case you care to take a second look. You're also confusing atheism with Godlessness which, although would lead us to a question of semantics, is still relevant seeing as there are/is God outside of Theism.

Christianity is in contrast to Judaism and a separate religion in its own right, agreed.

Secular religion is just secular dogma or fanaticism. Again not that relevant, but does, in fact, exist.

I would disagree. Liberty comes from the right to own property and to have that right protected by law. The transition from monarchy to merchantilism allowed a proportion of society to experience liberty, but it was not until people could own property free from the confiscation of the State that liberty existed for all men.

This is why we are no longer free today. We can not own property free from the confiscation of the State (property taxes/ income taxes).

The idea that people would choose to reject a religious explanation for the universe does not equate to being under siege. No one has banned religious texts. No one has closed the doors to the churches.

Ordered societies are not the sole province of religion. Religion has many benefits and potential liabilities, but it is what it has always been- a structure to accumulate power and a beacon of hope for those that need hope and understanding. The history of religion is a history of repression of non-believers and intolerance. It is not a history of liberty- unless you choose to believe and we can say that about fascism as well- and I am not saying they are similar. I hope you know what I mean.

"What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.

Each of us has a natural right--from God--to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties?

If every person has the right to defend -- even by force -- his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right -- its reason for existing, its lawfulness -- is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force -- for the same reason -- cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.

Such a perversion of force would be, in both cases, contrary to our premise. Force has been given to us to defend our own individual rights. Who will dare to say that force has been given to us to destroy the equal rights of our brothers? Since no individual acting separately can lawfully use force to destroy the rights of others, does it not logically follow that the same principle also applies to the common force that is nothing more than the organized combination of the individual forces?

If this is true, then nothing can be more evident than this: The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all."

Since there are no god's only men. When religion preaches and teaches it is creating a "straw man". An invisible embodyment of something. That something is then manifested into reality in the form of government. Which is why religion always tries to put unassalable properties into the strawman. Such as knowing everything, always being right, being the only thing worthy of punishing.

It's true that societies still create governments that have very little religon but they are very few and far between. And the government usually takes on the strawman powers anyway and uses it's identification with or without a facade creation of religion.

This is the basis of the US court system.

Sweden just gave religious rights to pirates by making data and data sharing holy. Now it takes a physical manifestion of people willing to enforce the strawman which is why they did it. Because the government won't take up the strawmans identification it will sit there and remain dormant. Or it could manifest itself in tons of out of work programmers that make anonymous look like a minor nuisance.

Fantastic post. I'm 37 and you have done a great job summarizing my awakening from a drooling, neo-con sheep to a sovereign individual with true understanding of what liberty is during the past 4 years. It's impossible to explain to those still living in the left-right haze, but once that lightbulb of liberty flickers for a split second in your head, there is NO going back, only forward. I have 2 boys, one's two years, the other two months. I thank God each day that my eyes were wide open to the tryranny in finances, debt slavery, medicine, food production, government, etc. before they were born. There is so much my misguided father didn't teach me about the real world we occupy, and my boys will grow up not knowing any other way. Godspeed Dr. Paul and ZHers!

Personally, I am just scared that there will be voting fraud and hell be silenced that way. in my opinion it doesnt matter the "checks" on the ballot, its the people who are counting them that are more important this year. thoughts?

I fear this too. But I also think it will be very apparant if this route is chosen by the establishment. And in that event, I think the millions that have been affected by Dr. Paul's message will not simply say "Aw shucks, better luck next time", and return to their regularly scheduled programming - if you catch my drift. :-)

ZH'ers. THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY. In 1992, I voted for RP1 (Ross Perot) and got Clinton/Rubin/Summers/TBTF. While that might seem like a disaster, it merely hastened the pace of the inevitable and brought us to today: D-day.

If you don't want to, you confirm you are the One-Party / Two-Branch Oligarchic Corporatocracy.

BUT THIS TIME, IT IS OUR WAY, OR BHO-TERM #2.

That will surely bring the system down hard.

At least if Ron Paul is IN, we have a guy that understands the $$$ of the equation and we have a fighting chance ... instead of Arch-Traitors, Execute them in the public square, Robert Rubin & Larry Summers.

We have a chance to navigate it (want to see how? read Rickards "Currency Wars") this time.

RP has played this the right way. By entering as Republican, he has elevated the stark contrast between Liberty and the RINO Corporatocracy.

Now, when he goes Independent, he can take a boatload of republic restoration folks with him. Sign me up.

The concept of the USA Republic is too damn good to piss away. Let's get it back.

*** F*K OFF ESTABLISHMENT. OUR WAY OR THE HIGHWAY ***

Either way. F*K OFF.

ZH'ers are ready for BOTH games.

RON PAUL 2012 - INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE. Eclipsing Ross Perot's 19% of the 1992 public vote. We almost had it then. Let's get it NOW.

Eclipsing Ross Perot's 19% of the 1992 public vote. We almost had it then. Let's get it NOW.

19% isn't really almost. I don't believe Ron Paul will win as an independent. I also don't believe he is the only hope of like-minded folks. He happens to be the only one with the platform and visibility to reasonably challenge for high office. Which begs the question - what do the voters in his district know that others around the country don't. OR...is it that maybe more of such like-minded folks should run for office to give the movement a chance. Just sayin'

For the record (again)...I do not think he will or can win because the system is broken. Unless and until there is a plurality of Consitution-respecting folks in high-office, the system just rolls forward with ever-increasing mass. It will break on its own and then the question becomes what ideals will constitute the reformation.

I agree the corrupt two-party system needs to be changed. What we need is a military coup. Let the military run things for 6 months, dissolve congress, and have a constitutional convention to vote on a proportional parliamentary system like the rest of the democracies. Then new elections.

If a winner-take-all two party system is so great, why didn't Germany and Japan get them after WWII? Or Iraq?

I disagree that we need to have a constitutional convention. You have no idea what language would come out of that. How would you feel if they (the writers of the new constitution) legitimized everything we've been fighting against, or most of them? We have a constitution that works fine IF it would be enforced and followed. This is the same mindset that thinks we need immigration reform to fix the fact that the administration doesn't want to enforce our current laws/borders. When we disregard the laws that are on the books we can't turn around and say we need new laws to fix the problem. The lack of enforcement IS THE PROBLEM.

John Adams, who declared that the framers were dedicated to “a government of laws and not of men,” left the people with the admonition that “the only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.”

The Constitution adequately provides what we need for a return to a republic and you are right to suspect the danger in a constitutional amendment and correct to say that the principles of the Constitution are not part of the political process but are a road map back to liberty.

The one thing that holds us together as a nation is the notion that this is a constitutional republic.The problems we now face in large part stem from entities within and outside the government corrupting that Constitution.

The Constitution like the Ten Commandments is an ethos that guides our everyday lives. It is the glue that binds our society together.Lincoln’s greatest failure was his shredding of the Constitution.His decision resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans, burned down one third of the country and made the south a colony of the north for one hundred years.

A similar decision by a benevolent dictator will have the same result.If you don’t want battles in your home towns, we must opt to work within the system.Vote every congressman and senator out of office that voted for the Patriot Act and the National Defense Authorization Act.Elect a new congress that will rescind these horrors.

For the record (again)...I do not think he will or can win because the system is broken.

Mayhem, this is the line used not only by the Empire supporters (Rush Limbaugh, Hannity et al.) but by the people who admired Ron Paul when his numbers were in single digits and his positions were mischaracterized by his enemies. The thousands who have sent money for the Ron Paul campaign never believed that he could not win. The continued rise and fall of candidates has been matched by a steady increase in Ron Paul’s support. This is the eve of the first primary; it is not the mantra of a Ron Paul supporter to buy in to the line used by his opponents.

Of the primaries coming up, Romney likely is going to win the NH primary; but lots of candidates have lost New Hampshire and gone on to win the presidency. It’s a long-term process and Ron Paul has been picking up delegates all along. This is far too early to be deciding what’s going to happen.

The point is that Ron Paul is steadily getting stronger; and he has a sweeping national organization. The Iran conflict may be the trigger of massive change.

Agree, the nuanced MSM-ish "talking point " of the article's closing sentence makes it apparent to anyone with an honest eye:

That, far more than the presidency, is his goal.

Translated it and it reads sumpin like, "Even if Dr. Paul doesn't win it for us, we still win because at least real issues had [at least] 98 seconds of podium time in a 2 hour lame stream debate.

Your observation that "This is the latest line of spin being pushed by the MSM" is spot on Mr. Murray. I am surprised, given ZH's preponderance of participants that are nothing less than very best qualified "Masters of the Obvious", that you received even one negative vote.

Yes, this tripe wrapped in a false hope article was same `o same `o MSM propaganda that desperately hoped to prepare us for Dr. Paul's defeat, and to change our reaction should the election again be stolen from us. This theme has already debuted in the usual suspect main stream politcal news speak.

They're all wrong. Paul will win.

Recall the colloquialism, "The barking dog does not bite"? Our barking dog was OWS. OWS is the infinitesimal iota of "us" 99%-ers not infected with the cynicism that afflicts the majority of us who stayed at home testing the sharpness of fang with tip of tongue. It's a reliable guess there gotz to be Americans soldering together pulse frequency modulators to jam communications and mapping out microwave repeaters, cell networks and power junctions. It would also not be to far fetched to imagine that 99% of our rank and file civil and uniformed service employees could very well be planning a coup and structuring a provisional government.

To the establishment - word to your mother - be careful of what you hope for and the extent of criminality you participate in to achieve your goals. There are hundreds of millions of sharped fanged wolves your drones will never see, your eavesdropping will never hear and your profilers will never recognize. Those wolves will stick them sharp fangs right down your throat and beleive me baby it hurts - you pull anymore of that shit you pulled in Iowa, you can kiss your fucking worthless asses good by.

Allow a metaphor Mr Mainstream Man: Imagine holding your guts in so they won't spill out a 10 inch wound and a knife held to your throat. You watch your children being pulverized to mince meat as your throat is slit and then spend the last 20 seconds of your miserable life listening to your loved ones scream for the fucking mercy of the gates to hell.

We know who you are. We know where you live. Turn yourself in. Confess to your crimes. Name your accomplices. Forfeit all assets, licenses and privileges and be prepared to spend a long time in them fusion centers your built with the wealth you extorted from us, OR ELSE, Mr Mainstream Man, you'll end it all as a very painful stain and your corpse will be a pilgrimage urinal.

The greatest contribution of Ron Paul is shining light on a coherent, doable set of policies that are consistent with economic realities.

He is the only candidate that is taking former Obama supporters. There are a lot of diaffected Obamites out there POed with O's betrayal on war, war on drugs, war on civil rights, war on the consumer, sell out to Goldman Sachs... they will not go back to Obama and they will certainly not go to any other Repub candidates. Ron Paul's organization wii go on to launch a 3rd party candidacy without Ron, but with his policy set intact. In a time when polls show that for the first time all incumbent congresscreatures are fighting uphill battles (remember the Tea Pary which just caved on debt ceiling and deficit reduction?), the prerequisite for a third party victory- let's call it the Constitutionalist party -are out there

The MSM are neither liberal democrat nor conservative republican. They are owned and controlled by their corporate masters, the only "persons" that count in America. These "persons" all suck at the government "defense spending" teat and stand to profit from endless fear, suspicion, and war. The media go along with it because they know that their very existence relies upon the same teat that their owners suckle. Nobody goes off script; anyone that did would not only be fired, but would be forever blackballed and unemployable.

The whole phony left/right liberal/conservative frame of reference is a tool used to distract and divide people. Liberal and conservative have lost all meaning except as pigeonholes into which people are placed based upon responses to divisive wedge issues. These wedge issues are then hyped by the corporate owned news media (CONMedia) in order to divert attention away from anything truly important.

Just your use of the terms "liberal" and "conservative" as if they had any real meaning tells me that your brainwashing still controls you. You seem to be proud that you watch no television, yet the CONMedia propaganda is still pulling your strings. Your use of the term "muslim" as a pejorative reveals how brainwashed and controlled you remain. Even if you've turned off your TV, you're still the serf of the CONMedia, because you have their kool-aid on your breath.

It doesn't matter if the label on the kool-aid dispenser is CNN, Limbaugh, ABC, Hannity, MSNBC, O'Reilly, NYT, BBC, Savage, WSJ, Coulter, Viacom, CNBC, Washington Post, or NPR; the kool-aid all comes from the same place.

A-fucking-men. We're basically boiling down to those who understand the global ponzi and those who don't. All we need do is look at the way MSNBC anchors were creaming their shorts when Obama launched $150 million in cruise missles into Libya in one night to launch an illegal war.

Just another illegal war, but this time under the Blue team banner, just to sort of spead the banners around a little.

No right, no left, just the owners of the global ponzi doing as they damn well please while the sheeple engage in meaningless bullcrap about Red team vs. Blue team.

Not even sure what the hell TV has to do with it. I like a good football game. I caught most of the episodes of The Walking Dead - watching a zombie get blown away is better than nothing when nothing else is on.

Conrad that quote of him not seeing himself in the Offal Office was asked "When you put your head on the pillow at night..." (paraphrasing) so in essence he took it as do you dream about being in the oval office and I believe that he does not dream about being in there because he doesn't dream about the power it offers instead he dreams about bringing liberty back to people and this is the only means to do it.

So you not only are misled but you are misleading people and it is probably because you live through the main stream media mind warping machine.

As far as Ron Paul saying he doesn't envision himself in the White House, that is not because he doesn't want to win, but because he is a very humble man. He said the same thing when he first ran for Congress, but he won over and over and has served honorably.